Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (Two-Disc Special Edition) | 
| Director: Steven Spielberg
Actors: Harrison Ford, Cate Blanchett, Shia Labeouf, Karen Allen, Ray Winstone
Studio: Paramount Home Entertainment
Category: DVD
List Price: $39.99
Buy New: $22.99
You Save: $17.00 (43%)
Avg. Customer Rating:  225 reviews
Sales Rank: 19
Format: Anamorphic, Color, Dolby, Ntsc, Widescreen
Languages: English (Original Language), German (Original Language), Russian (Original Language)
Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Number Of Items: 2
Running Time: 122
Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1
UPC: 097361390246
EAN: 0097361390246
ASIN: B00005JPO1
Theatrical Release Date: May 22, 2008
Release Date: October 14, 2008 (In 39 Days)
Shipping: Eligible for Super Saver Shipping
Promotion: Save $5.00 when you spend $25.00 or more on Qualifying Items offered by Amazon.com. Enter code BMLSAVES at checkout. Terms and Conditions
Availability: Not yet released
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com
Nearly 20 years after riding his last Crusade, Harrison Ford makes a welcome return as archaeologist/relic hunter Indiana Jones in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, an action-packed fourth installment that's, in a nutshell, less memorable than the first three but great nostalgia for fans of the series. Producer George Lucas and screenwriter David Koepp (War of the Worlds) set the film during the cold war, as the Soviets--replacing Nazis as Indy's villains of choice and led by a sword-wielding Cate Blanchett with black bob and sunglasses--are in pursuit of a crystal skull, which has mystical powers related to a city of gold. After escaping from them in a spectacular opening action sequence, Indy is coerced to head to Peru at the behest of a young greaser (Shia LaBeouf) whose friend--and Indy's colleague--Professor Oxley (John Hurt) has been captured for his knowledge of the skull's whereabouts. Whatever secrets the skull holds are tertiary; its reveal is the weakest part of the movie, as the CGI effects that inevitably accompany it feel jarring next to the boulder-rolling world of Indy audiences knew and loved. There's plenty of comedy, delightful stunts--ants play a deadly role here--and the return of Raiders love interest Karen Allen as Marion Ravenwood, once shrill but now softened, giving her ex-love bemused glances and eye-rolls as he huffs his way to save the day. Which brings us to Ford: bullwhip still in hand, he's a little creakier, a lot grayer, but still twice the action hero of anyone in film today. With all the anticipation and hype leading up to the film's release, perhaps no reunion is sweeter than that of Ford with the role that fits him as snugly as that fedora hat. --Ellen A. Kim
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 220 more reviews...
 About what I Thought it would be September 3, 2008
Don't get me wrong, I love Indiana Jones and Harrison Ford. I like this movie but I don't love it. Sean Connery was 53 the last time he played Bond and Roger Moore was 57. They both looked too old for the part. Ford is 65. The last guy to punch out bad guys at a similar age was John Wayne. There are some nice touches : bring back Karen Allen, acknowledging the passing of Denholm Elliot. Rosewell? Crystal Skulls? Worth having as part of an overall Indy collection. It's better than the three turds Lucas calls his chapters I-III of STAR WARS saga.
 Loved Temple of Doom....Hated Koftcs September 3, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
Why is George Lucas intent on ruining the two franchises (Star Wars and Indy) that brought him to prominence and established him as a household name? This movie started going downhill from the very first scene with the ridiculously generated prairie dog. It sets the tone for the whole movie: Scenes that are completely over the top and are done in such a lazy fashion that the contemporary "Mummy" movies look like high art in comparison. Over the top is fine as long as it is done with a certain flair and injecting humor (exhibit A: grossout dinner scene and rollercoaster traincart ride in ToD). I hated the prairie dogs and the monkeys that Shia rallies to his "cause". The George Lucas/Steve Spielberg of 20 years ago would've put forth a little more effort in making scenes like these believable both in terms of quality of special effects and within the context of the story. They fail on both counts on these scenes and multiple others.
George Lucas has reached a point in his career where A)he doesn't have to try as hard to make a good movie (the studios will throw money at him regardless of the ideas he proposes) and B) is surrounded by people that idolize him and know better than to criticize his ideas. Result: 3 star wars prequels and an indy film that don't even come close to the level of quality of anything he has been involved in prior to 1990.
Mackshere speaks the truth September 2, 2008
6 out of 6 found this review helpful
No time for love Dr. Jones!
or plot, dialogue, characters, common sense...
This movie is a fine example of big budget/$hamefully pathetic filmmaking.
Henry Jones, nicknamed "Indiana" after hitting the game-winning three pointer for the Hoosiers during the Final Four in 1940. Anyway, he's your favorite tomb raider/archaeologist. In this episode, he's invading an alien ant farm in search of a crystal skull.
[...] It takes place 10 years after Raiders of the Lost Ark left off, but somehow Indiana learns he has an 18 yr. old son, courtesy of his old flame Marion. Okay, insignificant plot detail, let's get to the movie...
Indy is up against the Nazis, oops I mean the Russians, who have somehow infiltrated the most secretive U.S government warehouse where the Ark was stashed. Everybody starts to fight against the most evil villain ever created, the CGI monster. It's a losing battle.
I knew beforehand this movie wouldn't be anything original. Regurgitated plot, cardboard characters, unimaginative dialogue. Still I was disillusioned in thinking this might have some cool special effects and stunts. No such luck, [...]. Very fake looking, super-unrealistic, really just plain [...]. Not entertaining or exciting in the least bit. Probably the worst special effects I have ever seen in such a big budget film.
Speilberg (and Co.) cashed in with an easy payday, but this is hardly his best work. People want to love this film, solely because of the nostalgic factor. But seriously, this is just a plain bad movie.
 to me its better than crusade but not by much September 1, 2008
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
raiders *****
temple ****1/2
Crusade ****
Crystal ****
raiders will be my fav with a temple in 2nd.just not sure which is 3rd or fourth.
Me and mine enjoyed it August 30, 2008
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
I saw this movie with my step-father, my husband and my brother and all four of us liked it a lot. Then I saw it again with my daughter, who never saw any of the originals but is a big Tomb Raider fan. She's 14 and she liked it. Then she went to see it again with her grandmother who doesn't like a damn thing, and SHE liked it.
I think Harrison Ford looks just fine. Far better than most men his age. He was believable enough. Some of the stunts were no less realistic than were in the original movies. The CGI made the effects more believable, not less.
I don't know what other people are complaining about. The UFO thing was big in the 50's. The timing is right. The kid, Mutt, wasn't so fabulous, but I wasn't expecting Oscar material here.
People say Lord of the Rings was a masterpiece. I hated it, but that's besides the point. The point is, is Lord of the Rings more believable than Indiana Jones? Are those ugly trolls and monsters more believable than the elegant crystal skulls? Its fantasy. That's all its meant to be.
Suspend reality and enjoy the ride. Its a fun movie and I am speaking for 6 people here, some of whom lack imagination, who all enjoyed it.
|
|
|
